Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.

Screen flickering / PWM detected

217.4 Hz

50 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 217.4 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 50 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 217.4 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 58 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 5519 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

ℹ

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.

↔ Response Time Black to White

32.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined

↗ 19.2 ms rise

↘ 13.6 ms fall

The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 83 % of all devices are better.This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (26.9 ms).

↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey

42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined

↗ 21.2 ms rise

↘ 20.8 ms fall

The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 51 % of all devices are better.This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (43 ms).

Lenovo ThinkPad Yoga 370-20JJS00100 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.4 dB)Bass 100 - 315 Hz(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.5% lower than median(+) | bass is linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)Mids 400 - 2000 Hz(+) | balanced mids - only 4.4% away from median(+) | mids are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)Highs 2 - 16 kHz(+) | balanced highs - only 4.6% away from median(+) | highs are linear (6.9% delta to prev. frequency)Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.7% difference to median)Compared to same class» 53% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 42% worse» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 23%, worst was 53%Compared to all devices tested» 55% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 38% worse» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

HP EliteBook x360 1030 G2 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.3 dB)Analysis not possible as minimum curve is missing or too high

Lenovo has made it easier for us this year. Instead of having to choose between a 12.5 and a 14-inch model all we get is a single 13.3-inch ThinkPad Yoga. We support this change - rather than offering two somewhat disappointing models Lenovo found the perfect balance between display size and mobility. The Yoga 370 ticks a lot of important boxes. The keyboard and its other input devices, including the stylus, are very good. Aside from a minor manufacturing weakness in the display lid, which barely qualifies as quality inconsistency, the case is well-made, sturdy, and it is easy to disassemble. Port availability is generous, although we would have preferred a full-size SD-card reader, and battery life has been improved considerably compared to the Yoga 260. Last but not least, the display is one of the strongest selling points of this laptop and also a noticeable improvement from the Yoga 260 and Yoga 460.

Unfortunately, it suffered from PWM-flickering at lower brightness levels, which is going to be deal-breaker for some users. The cooling system offered the most room for improvement: both temperatures and volume lack refinement but are far from the X270's dramatic levels. Our review unit was also incapable of utilizing its full performance potential, and the RAM limitations (only 8 GB with WWAN) are peculiar, to say the least. Nevertheless, all these issues were overshadowed by the price and the short warranty - two aspects that have nothing to do with the hardware itself.

Well done. The ThinkPad Yoga 370 won us over in many regards and has rightly deserved the highest score of all ThinkPad Yoga devices short of the much more expensive Yoga X1.

On the whole, the Yoga 370 is a very good convertible with a focus on productivity, and it deserves a recommendation. Its closest competitor, the HP EliteBook x360, has its benefits, too, namely the much better battery life. However, it is also more expensive and has a notably darker display to boot. The Dell XPS 13 2-in-1 is interesting for consumers with lower performance expectations preferring a fanless device since it lacks some significant business features. In terms of in-house competition, the ThinkPad X1 Yoga, whose 2017 model we have yet to test, might be an alternative for those with a bigger budget. Its OLED display is phenomenal yet also immensely expensive. The X1 Carbon, which is slightly cheaper than the X1 Yoga, can be an alternative to the Yoga 370 for those users who don’t need a convertible and who prefer a matte display.

Please note: Due to its classification as “Convertible” the ThinkPad Yoga 370 scored just below the “Very Good” level. If it had been classified as an office notebook it would have scored a very good 89%.